If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Wall Street Journal)   Recent anti-pro-anti-anti- discrimination court finding is a travesty of a mockery of a sham of a mockery of a travesty of two mockeries of a sham   (online.wsj.com) divider line 166
    More: Interesting  
•       •       •

4994 clicks; posted to Main » on 06 Jul 2011 at 9:23 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



166 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-07-06 09:25:41 AM
Sham?

Wow...
 
2011-07-06 09:28:45 AM
Remember kids, it's only racism if white people do it
 
2011-07-06 09:32:27 AM
Article and topic are kinda stupid, but I really enjoyed the headline.
 
2011-07-06 09:34:28 AM
I refuse to support anything Rupert Murdoch foists on the public.

No clickey, ever.
 
2011-07-06 09:34:50 AM

stirfrybry: Remember kids, it's only racism if white people do it


Slight correction -- white men.
 
2011-07-06 09:35:20 AM
I'm not sure if I read that article right, and I gave up after the migraine kicked in. But If it says what I THINK it says, Michigan is back to allowing discrimination IN FAVOR OF minorities?

/I hate legalese
//MI has the tendency of choosing complete morons to lead the state
 
2011-07-06 09:35:40 AM
This thread should be fun.
 
2011-07-06 09:37:15 AM

stirfrybry: Remember kids, it's only racism if white people do it


Poor you.
 
2011-07-06 09:37:32 AM

X-boxershorts: I refuse to support anything Rupert Murdoch foists on the public.

No clickey, ever.


"I vow to remain ignorant and allow nothing to upset my delicate sensitivities." ~ X-boxershorts
 
2011-07-06 09:39:51 AM
There's a difference between 'not using race/gender/etc' in the admissions process, and a quota system to force an institution to be more diverse without merit.

The former is acceptable. The latter is not.
WSJ oversimplifying things doesn't help.
 
2011-07-06 09:40:20 AM
Who needs the best when you can have perceived equality? If anything I would think thats the man holding them down by pushing them ahead. Allowing less qualified people to excel in the long run actually just holds them back.
 
2011-07-06 09:43:50 AM
images.icanhascheezburger.com
 
2011-07-06 09:47:52 AM
Summary: They made it illegal to not be racist.

These judges are d-bags.
 
2011-07-06 09:48:01 AM

protectyourlimbs: Who needs the best when you can have perceived equality? If anything I would think thats the man holding them down by pushing them ahead. Allowing less qualified people to excel in the long run actually just holds them back.


Where is the outrage on this? Not the outrage from whites, but from minorities. It is insulting that they need a preferential treatment to succeed. It is like the son of a business owner. No matter if they deserve a high paying position or not, everyone at the company will always think they got it because they got preferential treatment.
 
2011-07-06 09:48:05 AM
t3.gstatic.com

Agrees.
 
2011-07-06 09:48:40 AM

Charles Martel: X-boxershorts: I refuse to support anything Rupert Murdoch foists on the public.

No clickey, ever.

"I vow to remain ignorant and allow nothing to upset my delicate sensitivities." ~ X-boxershorts


Oh, you are so clever...
I still refuse to support blatant, constant propaganda, regardless of whether or not you bathe in it regularly.
 
2011-07-06 09:51:58 AM

MrBallou: Article and topic are kinda stupid, but I really enjoyed the headline.


This
 
2011-07-06 09:52:41 AM

protectyourlimbs: Who needs the best when you can have perceived equality? If anything I would think thats the man holding them down by pushing them ahead. Allowing less qualified people to excel in the long run actually just holds them back.


That's not the legal justification for affirmative action.
 
2011-07-06 09:53:42 AM

X-boxershorts: I refuse to support anything Rupert Murdoch foists on the public.

No clickey, ever.


Yeah, he gets a dollar every time you click on a Wall Street Journal link.

// Dumbass
 
2011-07-06 09:54:43 AM
img17.imageshack.us
 
2011-07-06 09:55:10 AM

ib_thinkin: protectyourlimbs: Who needs the best when you can have perceived equality? If anything I would think thats the man holding them down by pushing them ahead. Allowing less qualified people to excel in the long run actually just holds them back.

That's not the legal justification for affirmative action.


Is that because there is no legal justification for affirmative action state-sponsored racism?
 
2011-07-06 09:55:25 AM
The only thing that should qualify you for a place in further education is `are you smart enough?`. Ignore economic background, postcode, colour and sex. None of these things should be used to determine whether you get a place. The simple way to see if something is wrong or not is to reverse the situation.

Is it wrong to ensure enough white people go to college and to give them places even if someone of another colour is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Is it wrong to ensure enough black people go to college and to give them places even if someone of another colour is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Is it wrong to ensure enough male people go to college and to give them places even if a female person is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Is it wrong to ensure enough female people go to college and to give them places even if a male person is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Now study your own reactions to these four questions. If you react differently to any of the questions you may have racial or sexual bias.
 
2011-07-06 09:55:33 AM

Charles Martel: X-boxershorts: I refuse to support anything Rupert Murdoch foists on the public.

No clickey, ever.

"I vow to remain ignorant and allow nothing to upset my delicate sensitivities." ~ X-boxershorts


Argumentum ad hominem: The First Pillar of Internet Forums.
 
2011-07-06 09:58:40 AM

dready zim: The only thing that should qualify you for a place in further education is `are you smart enough?`. Ignore economic background, postcode, colour and sex. None of these things should be used to determine whether you get a place. The simple way to see if something is wrong or not is to reverse the situation.


Someone gets it right. The same logic can also be applied to jokes by the way to determine if they're racist.
 
2011-07-06 09:58:56 AM

Task_Monkey: Argumentum ad hominem: The First Pillar of Internet Forums.


Only a farking idiot would call that ad hominem.
 
2011-07-06 10:01:26 AM

dready zim: The only thing that should qualify you for a place in further education is `are you smart enough?`. Ignore economic background, postcode, colour and sex. None of these things should be used to determine whether you get a place. The simple way to see if something is wrong or not is to reverse the situation.

Is it wrong to ensure enough white people go to college and to give them places even if someone of another colour is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Is it wrong to ensure enough black people go to college and to give them places even if someone of another colour is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Is it wrong to ensure enough male people go to college and to give them places even if a female person is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Is it wrong to ensure enough female people go to college and to give them places even if a male person is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?

Now study your own reactions to these four questions. If you react differently to any of the questions you may have racial or sexual bias.


How do you measure "smart enough"?
 
2011-07-06 10:07:06 AM

House of Tards: stirfrybry: Remember kids, it's only racism if white people do it

Poor you.


Poor me? LOL no. I didn't need the government to clear my path. I don't need the handouts. My culture is one of hard work and self-sufficiency.

Poor minorities. It must suck to not be able to take responsibility for your own life.
 
2011-07-06 10:09:32 AM

X-boxershorts: Oh, you are so clever...
I still refuse to support blatant, constant propaganda, regardless of whether or not you bathe in it regularly.


No, no. I think you are absolutely right. You, of all people, should never ever read anything that might challenged the prejudices you hold so dear.

If Media Matters does not give its stamp of approval -- you should happily ignore it.

Please continue.
 
2011-07-06 10:09:55 AM

stirfrybry: My culture is one of hard work and self-sufficiency.


You're an illegally immigrated farm worker?
 
2011-07-06 10:10:48 AM
Came for the Miller Lite commercial...leaving disappointed. BURGLEFLICKLE!
 
2011-07-06 10:10:49 AM

stirfrybry: House of Tards: stirfrybry: Remember kids, it's only racism if white people do it

Poor you.

Poor me? LOL no. I didn't need the government to clear my path. I don't need the handouts. My culture is one of hard work and self-sufficiency.

Poor minorities. It must suck to not be able to take responsibility for your own life.


But don't you dare call him racist!
 
2011-07-06 10:11:29 AM

stirfrybry: I didn't need the government to clear my path.


Then I suppose it's cruel of me to point out that it's been happening for the better part of your life.
 
2011-07-06 10:12:36 AM

Deucednuisance: Sham?

Wow...


makes me want to slapchop someone.
 
2011-07-06 10:13:30 AM

mjbok: Where is the outrage on this? Not the outrage from whites, but from minorities. It is insulting that they need a preferential treatment to succeed. It is like the son of a business owner. No matter if they deserve a high paying position or not, everyone at the company will always think they got it because they got preferential treatment.


Some minorities are overrepresented, and gain no advantage from all these racial politics.

/It's okay to exclude the right kind of brown skin because there's too many of them in some areas.
 
2011-07-06 10:14:57 AM

Charles Martel: X-boxershorts: Oh, you are so clever...
I still refuse to support blatant, constant propaganda, regardless of whether or not you bathe in it regularly.

No, no. I think you are absolutely right. You, of all people, should never ever read anything that might challenged the prejudices you hold so dear.

If Media Matters does not give its stamp of approval -- you should happily ignore it.

Please continue.


Speaking of prejudices....did you just not display your own?

Blow me asshole. KTHNXBY
 
2011-07-06 10:15:56 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: How do you measure "smart enough"?


If you have 100 places, the top 100 when tested in an appropriate manner.

How do you measure `smart enough`?
 
2011-07-06 10:15:58 AM
Holy crap. A thread devoted to arguing politics over the origins of this:

i2.photobucket.com

If this isn't the rock bottom of the internet, it's damned close.
 
2011-07-06 10:16:53 AM

legion_of_doo: Some minorities are overrepresented, and gain no advantage from all these racial politics.


You mean there are no retention programs for Asians in colleges? That's racist.
 
2011-07-06 10:18:27 AM
Is it wrong to ensure enough white people go to college and to give them places even if someone of another colour is more qualified to make the ratio the same as the population?


I don't see too many whites knocking on the door at Florida A&M. It does happen, but not enough for the school to have to "ensure" admissions.
 
2011-07-06 10:18:27 AM
Whoops. Wrong thread.
 
2011-07-06 10:18:56 AM

mjbok: Where is the outrage on this? Not the outrage from whites, but from minorities.


here is an outraged white (well more accurately pink or maybe sometimes a pale blue), just to bust your prejudice.
 
2011-07-06 10:19:34 AM

Task_Monkey: Argumentum ad hominem: The First Pillar of Internet Forums.


No, argumentum ad hominem would be if I said "Task Monkey is a big, fat, poopy-head."

Live it. Love it. Know the difference.
 
2011-07-06 10:22:00 AM

dready zim: Philip Francis Queeg: How do you measure "smart enough"?

If you have 100 places, the top 100 when tested in an appropriate manner.

How do you measure `smart enough`?


How do you test "in an appropriate manner" to determine who is actually smarter, not just educationally better prepared for the test? Do you honestly believe there is some form of an exam which produces valid results of who is "smarter" regardless of the background and education of the people being examined?
 
2011-07-06 10:23:15 AM

X-boxershorts: Blow me asshole. KTHNXBY


Now you see, Task Monkey? This is an example of argumentum ad hominem. I will grant you it's unimaginative and poorly executed but it's genuine argumentum ad hominem nonetheless.
 
zez
2011-07-06 10:26:38 AM
What is that headline stolen from? It's driving me crazy.
 
2011-07-06 10:26:50 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: How do you measure "smart enough"?


I woudl go with a test that gives no preference for skin color or sex.

You have something else in mind?


Cinaed: There's a difference between 'not using race/gender/etc' in the admissions process, and a quota system to force an institution to be more diverse without merit.

The former is acceptable. The latter is not.
WSJ oversimplifying things doesn't help.


What is the difference?
 
2011-07-06 10:28:07 AM

zez: What is that headline stolen from? It's driving me crazy.


Link.
 
2011-07-06 10:28:37 AM

Charles Martel: Task_Monkey: Argumentum ad hominem: The First Pillar of Internet Forums.

No, argumentum ad hominem would be if I said "Task Monkey is a big, fat, poopy-head."

Live it. Love it. Know the difference.


You applied an ad hominem attack against me. You're just too stupid to realize it. Assuming that since I refuse to support the thug Rupert Murdoch that I remain both ignorant and attached at the hip to media matters.

neither one of which is accurate and both of which are common neoliberal tactics of attacking those they view as political opponents.

I rarely read media matters and I still refuse to support someone I perceive to be a master propagandist.

And your referral towards me as some kind of ignorant leftist is about as ad hominem as it gets.

Allow me to cure your own ignorance:

The "ad hominem wiki" (new window)

And you can still blow me.
 
2011-07-06 10:29:55 AM

Philip Francis Queeg: How do you test "in an appropriate manner" to determine who is actually smarter, not just educationally better prepared for the test? Do you honestly believe there is some form of an exam which produces valid results of who is "smarter" regardless of the background and education of the people being examined?


3/10

Not bad but work on the repetition, your second troll was just a rework of the first without answering the question for yourself which showed you were sat under a bridge. Trolltip : maybe answer the question as a smokescreen but make the answer inflammatory.
 
2011-07-06 10:31:29 AM
That's a shamavestockery!
 
Displayed 50 of 166 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report